By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Dear PlayStation Fans: Trickle-Down Economics Isn't Real!

I'm noticing it, and maybe you are, too: PlayStation is showing increasingly greedy signs. But the one I continue to take issue with is the $10 increase in their game prices. Acting happy to pay that extra isn't the flex PS fans think it is.

No written version, but because I'm avoiding it, but because this is more of PSA video.  It's a good thing there's such a tiny Sony fandom presence on the forum... ... lol



Check out my entertainment gaming channel!
^^/
Around the Network

Yeah this thread feels like a disaster in the making.

"Acting happy to pay that extra isn't the flex PS fans think it is." Gonna need a source for that. No one is flexing. They are understanding what it is going towards and appreciating that.

It starts costing more. Then the price goes down. The features stay added, the cost goes down - so I don't care at all.

"It's a good thing there's such a tiny Sony fandom presence on the forum... ... lol" This feels like Sony bait.

I didn't watch your video. You did a bad job in getting me to watch it. You made outlandish claims, put no thought into what you wrote, and very much come off as baiting people.

You've also had complaints in previous threads so I'm curious if your strategy is to just bait people into bumping your threads. If so - stop it.



You are bound to love Earthbound.

@ZyroXZ2. It's an absolutely fair concern that is well known in the gaming community. However, there are answers. While it may seem absurd that GOW Ragnarok will release at 10$ higher than the PS4 version having the same features on newer hardware, there are 2 things to consider:
- The price hike is a transition, meaning that Sony wants that new price across the board. So next gen you won't see that jump it will be de facto.

- The graphical improvements that will not be visible on the PS4 require game engines to evolve and for advanced features to be used in the games. This requires effort.

The problem in your POV is that you feel that these companies should not be allowed to be greedy, but if people buy then there's nothing greedy about it: it's pure supply and demand, basic economics. Nintendo in your view is the most greedy, but people are buying their software and hardware in droves and thus are willing to pay for it. The moment they'll feel extorted is the moment they will stop paying.

The issue here is not that Sony or Nintendo is greedy, but whether they can get away with it or not. And with stiff competition from PC and Microsoft in the realm of high-end graphics, and with MS starting to play very aggressive with gamepass, Sony is not in a position to play these games and it will ultimately hurt them in the long run. They will be forced to tune back down to competitive prices if they want to stay relevant. And they will. It's all pendulum swings.

Bandorr said:

Yeah this thread feels like a disaster in the making.

"Acting happy to pay that extra isn't the flex PS fans think it is." Gonna need a source for that. No one is flexing. They are understanding what it is going towards and appreciating that.

It starts costing more. Then the price goes down. The features stay added, the cost goes down - so I don't care at all.

"It's a good thing there's such a tiny Sony fandom presence on the forum... ... lol" This feels like Sony bait.

I didn't watch your video. You did a bad job in getting me to watch it. You made outlandish claims, put no thought into what you wrote, and very much come off as baiting people.

You've also had complaints in previous threads so I'm curious if your strategy is to just bait people into bumping your threads. If so - stop it.

It took for him to attack Sony for mods to react? Make up your minds and be more platform neutral.

Does the Steam Deck REALLY Destroy the Switch?



You already know I'm not a single-platform loyalist so I don't have a horse in this race, but the $70 price point for new games was a long time coming. While Sony is the only console maker to do that so far with their own first-party titles, we've seen big third parties like Activision and Take-Two raise their prices to that point as well. It's only a matter of time before other companies start to follow suit. Inflation does matter for these things. The $60 price point was established as the norm back in 2005 when the 360 was released. That was 17 years ago. Since then, the dollar has lost fully a third of its purchasing power, meaning that a $60 game in Nov. 2005 was the equivalent of a $90 game today. Everybody also knows that recent inflation has been substantially higher. It's high enough to the point where $70 now has the same purchasing power as $60 did back in 2019. That means the price hike seen with first-party Sony games and certain third-party titles has already been effectively erased. Even when the $70 price point first hit in Nov. 2020, that was only the equivalent of what $60 was worth back in 2011.

Software prices on consoles are lower than they've ever been. That's not an opinion. That's simply a matter of fact. Yes, add-ons like DLC and microtransactions exist. They are also completely optional (and in some cases make things better than the old days; fighting game roster expansions come to mind). Of course, if someone chooses to pay the full $60-70 price for some AAA multiplayer title and plunks down dozens of dollars on purely cosmetic items, well, I fail to see how that's fully on the publisher and not the player (not that I'm excusing BS like loot boxes or what have you, but personal responsibility has to enter the equation at some point when it comes to spending money on optional add-ons). There's also plenty of good games that still launch for $60 or less (it seems pricing is far less standardized for retail-release titles these days), and many if not most non-Nintendo titles go down in price after a few months. There's also the option of subscription services like Game Pass, which gives you access to a huge selection of titles for the cost of two full-price games a year.

Aside from Halo (and I haven't had to pay for DLC maps in that series since 2013), I only play single-player games, and I know it's far easier on my wallet to buy video games now than it was 15-20 years ago. I've bought like five games already this year at an average of less than $40 per game through a combination of waiting and taking advantage of sales. There are still some games I consider "top priority" and do pay full price day one for them. Would I rather pay $60 than $70 for them. Sure. But I'm not going to lose any sleep over a price hike that was quite frankly inevitable.

To put how much cheaper the base price of a game is today in visual terms:




With only two major price hikes to the standard top price point in the past 20 years, console games haven't even come close to keeping up with inflation. In terms of pure sticker price, the $70 price point for a AAA console title is not by any means a rip-off in and of itself. Nobody should have assumed that console games would have stayed $60 forever. I knew it was coming, and was not surprised one bit when we finally got a price hike after two full console generations. I wouldn't even be surprised if we see the top price point for a new game go up to $80 next generation.

As the old saying goes, a dollar simply doesn't go as far these days.

Of course, this is just for the U.S. When it comes to historical and current inflation rates, for non-Americans your mileage obviously will vary.


P.S.: Current-gen versions of games being $10 higher than their last-gen versions isn't anything new, either. We saw that back at the start of Gen 7. I distinctly recall the PS2 versions of some games costing $50 while the 360 version was $60.

P.P.S: Trickle-down economics is indeed bullshit, though, but that's not what's really at issue here. Inflation is.

Last edited by Shadow1980 - on 10 September 2022

Visit http://shadowofthevoid.wordpress.com

In accordance to the VGC forum rules, §8.5, I hereby exercise my right to demand to be left alone regarding the subject of the effects of the pandemic on video game sales (i.e., "COVID bump").

Their pricing tactics this gen are dirty for sure, on multiple levels. They've got a long way to go still to catch up with Nintendo though xD



Around the Network

I am not that against the 70 euro price for a game if it's a very high budget game. Square Enix does it pretty well I think. Lower budget titles as diofield chronicles are around 50 euro (disc), while games like Forspoken and probably Final Fantasy 16 will be more expensive.

Which is better than 5he route Sony takes that everything is top dollar including TLOU p1 and to an extent Returnal. On the bright side PS games decrease in price over time. The 10 euro upgrade between versions is more stinging if you ask me.



Please excuse my (probally) poor grammar

padib said:

It took for him to attack Sony for mods to react? Make up your minds and be more platform neutral.

Does the Steam Deck REALLY Destroy the Switch?

We haven't taken any actual action thus far.
Nor are we all Pro-Sony, you should know better than that with the amount of PC gamers on the team like myself.

Chrizum received the warning because it was an open attack on another individual, nothing to do with the platform itself, nor is this even the appropriate avenue to have a whinge.

Qwark said:

I am not that against the 70 euro price for a game if it's a very high budget game. Square Enix does it pretty well I think. Lower budget titles as diofield chronicles are around 50 euro (disc), while games like Forspoken and probably Final Fantasy 16 will be more expensive.

Which is better than 5he route Sony takes that everything is top dollar including TLOU p1 and to an extent Returnal. On the bright side PS games decrease in price over time. The 10 euro upgrade between versions is more stinging if you ask me.

Actually if games stayed at a static $60 US indefinitely, games would actually be getting cheaper over time due to inflation.

Yeah, higher prices suck. Yeah. It's not Pro-Consumer. Those are all relevant... I would prefer prices stayed the same or gotten cheaper, that benefits us the consumer... And the only way that will happen is with constructive criticism.

There has been a ton of examples in the past where console manufacturers have done something absurd, only for the community to create an uproar, which in return has meant the reversal of a policy.
Sadly that hasn't happened with these price increases.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Good video.

The growth in 1st party software sales and higher digital splits more than make up for inflation in my opinion. These companies are profit-driven so they'll squeeze every dollar from the consumer as long as they can get away with it, which would be smart from a business perspective when they do manage to get away with it. It was reported a while ago that Sony was observing the market reaction to Switch OLED ($50 more expensive than the standard model), less than a year later, they increased the price of both PS5 models. Their games MSRP went up by $10 in the US, and €20 in Europe at the start of the generation, and their half-assed upgrade paths aren't as good as Microsoft's. It's plain to see that they're capitalizing on their quality reputation and brand power.

But this:

"Acting happy to pay that extra isn't the flex PS fans think it is."

Is unnecessary and only speaks for a very small (if maybe loud) minority of Playstation fans.

Sony's latest financial reports revealed obvious declines in 1st party software sales on Playstation consoles even though 2022 has been one for their best years ever. No one can say for sure, but part of the decline may be the result of their new pricing model. There are obviously other factors at play like PS4 gamers waiting to get the supply-constrained PS5 to play the better version, and others waiting for the PC version now that they know Sony is supporting PC and the majority of their new games will come eventually, but we have no idea which of these 3 factors is the most significant at the moment.

If Sony does return to selling very well on Playstation, this would mean the consumer hype is outweighing their dissatisfaction with the price increase. The majority of Nintendo fans aren't happy about Nintendo's greed either, but... priorities!



I think the God of War 2018 comparison in your video didn't acknowledge the argument for the price increase.
It's something that big budget developers have been talking about since long before PS5/SX launched, and that is the increase in development costs for games.

So the question isn't really what that extra $10 gets you in God of War Ragnarok.
It's: should God of War 1018 have been $60 or $70?

I think that's a very nuanced issue.

In general, development costs for games have gone up by a lot. (Although this varies from game to game)
But some games also sell, or are expected to sell, a lot more than others as well. In those cases they can afford a lower price of entry, because they'll sell many more copies than what they need to break even.

I think some games should be more expensive than others.
But the problem is identifying which game deserves that price increase, and which games do not. As outsiders we can usually only really guess.
Oviously, a game like Final Fantasy 7 Remake cost a ton more to make than most games, who share the same $60 price tag.
While it's less obvious for other games.

If God of War 2018 should have been $70, then perhaps Ragnarok should as well. (Hard to say because the main work on the game engine has already been completed, etc.)

There's also inflation to consider, and I'm not even talking about the crazy one we are experiencing right now.

I don't really have a clear stance on this. But I do think some games should be able to charge more than $60. It's just hard for me to discern which games this applies for.

padib said:

It took for him to attack Sony for mods to react? Make up your minds and be more platform neutral.

Does the Steam Deck REALLY Destroy the Switch?

What reaction are you refering to?
Do you mean mods responding with their opinions? Mods also post as regular members, and have done so in other threads from this same user.

As for that Chizurum post, the platform in question was never even brought up, and the discussion was lead by Pemalight, who is mainly a PC guy.
The issue was that it was an open attack, and backseat moderating which should be handled through the report system, or PM.

And this is mainly why we have a rule against complaining about mod decisions in thread. The vast majority of the time, it's under a missinformed premise.
Just a few weeks ago we had someone make a thread complain about us locking one of ZyroXZ2's threads over "being too controversial", when it turns out we locked it because OP contacted us and said he wanted his own thread locked.

Last edited by Hiku - on 10 September 2022

I don't enjoy the price increases but Playstation games get price degrees over time. I observe this is more of a concern no early adopters, because they will absolutely need to pay full price for anything

But if you adopt a bit later (3-4 years after launch) the odds is that you will get the same games less expensive than they were at launch. I've found Returnal and Demon Souls for 200 BRL (~40 USD) which is 43% off compared to when they launched. I'm sure is more few years they will be 150 BRL then 100 BRL. Indeed you can literally buy half a dozen of PS4 first party for 60 BRL (~12 BRL). Sony and Ubisoft are the AAA publishers who have the least expensive games in long term